ZAKONITOST ŠTRAJKA – QUI, QUID, QUANDO ET QUOMODO?

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
Pravni Vjesnik Pub Date : 2018-12-01 DOI:10.25234/PV/6160
Andrijana Bilić, Trpimir Perkušić
{"title":"ZAKONITOST ŠTRAJKA – QUI, QUID, QUANDO ET QUOMODO?","authors":"Andrijana Bilić, Trpimir Perkušić","doi":"10.25234/PV/6160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An accelerated movement of capital and services in the context of globalisation has been noted outside of the national borders of EU member states. Therefore, both transnational transactions and dispatched workers issues have become daily commonplace. Given that employers wish to take advantage of what the individual internal market has to offer and thus decrease the price of work, these workers find themselves in an unenviable position. In order to protect their economic and social welfare interests, it is necessary to establish a productive transnational social welfare dialogue. Due to various levels of economic development and social welfare protection, collective bargaining of social partners and initiating strike as the most effective industrial relations on the part of the world of work, might fail. However, collective actions are still linked to the national system of industrial relations marked by their specific characteristics. Nevertheless, when it comes to the regulation of industrial actions, it should be emphasised that a whole series of legal loopholes and/or poor solutions exist within these systems, in particular related to the right to strike. The situation is even more complicated by the existence of international and regional legal sources governing this subject and binding the respective countries, particularly when national legislation provisions are not harmonised. Thus, it is easy to conclude that the current situation makes it more difficult, for not only strike organisation and implementation, but also for differentiating a legal from an illegal strike at transnational and national level. The paper applies the comparative method for bringing out numerous criticisms de lege lata while offering solutions de lege ferenda.","PeriodicalId":41100,"journal":{"name":"Pravni Vjesnik","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravni Vjesnik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25234/PV/6160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An accelerated movement of capital and services in the context of globalisation has been noted outside of the national borders of EU member states. Therefore, both transnational transactions and dispatched workers issues have become daily commonplace. Given that employers wish to take advantage of what the individual internal market has to offer and thus decrease the price of work, these workers find themselves in an unenviable position. In order to protect their economic and social welfare interests, it is necessary to establish a productive transnational social welfare dialogue. Due to various levels of economic development and social welfare protection, collective bargaining of social partners and initiating strike as the most effective industrial relations on the part of the world of work, might fail. However, collective actions are still linked to the national system of industrial relations marked by their specific characteristics. Nevertheless, when it comes to the regulation of industrial actions, it should be emphasised that a whole series of legal loopholes and/or poor solutions exist within these systems, in particular related to the right to strike. The situation is even more complicated by the existence of international and regional legal sources governing this subject and binding the respective countries, particularly when national legislation provisions are not harmonised. Thus, it is easy to conclude that the current situation makes it more difficult, for not only strike organisation and implementation, but also for differentiating a legal from an illegal strike at transnational and national level. The paper applies the comparative method for bringing out numerous criticisms de lege lata while offering solutions de lege ferenda.
ZAKONITOSTŠTRAJKA—乌,英镑,当QUOMODO呢?
在全球化背景下,资本和服务在欧盟成员国国界之外的加速流动已被注意到。因此,跨国交易和劳务派遣问题已经成为日常的家常便饭。鉴于雇主希望利用个人内部市场所提供的东西,从而降低工作价格,这些工人发现自己处于一个不令人羡慕的位置。为了保护他们的经济和社会福利利益,有必要建立富有成效的跨国社会福利对话。由于经济发展水平和社会福利保护水平的不同,作为劳动世界最有效的劳资关系,社会伙伴的集体谈判和发起罢工可能会失败。然而,集体行动仍然与以其具体特点为标志的国家劳资关系制度相联系。然而,当涉及到对工业行动的监管时,应该强调的是,这些制度中存在一系列法律漏洞和/或糟糕的解决方案,特别是与罢工权有关的问题。由于存在有关这一问题的国际和区域法律渊源,并对各国具有约束力,特别是在国家立法规定不协调的情况下,情况更加复杂。因此,很容易得出结论,目前的情况使罢工变得更加困难,不仅因为罢工的组织和实施,而且还因为在跨国和国家层面区分合法罢工和非法罢工。本文运用比较的方法,提出了许多法律上的批评,同时提出了法律上的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信